-
Respiratory Care Aug 2023The utilization of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for cardiopulmonary support continues to increase globally, with > 190,000 ECMO cases reported to the... (Review)
Review
The utilization of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for cardiopulmonary support continues to increase globally, with > 190,000 ECMO cases reported to the international Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry. The present review aims to synthesize important contributions to the literature surrounding the management of mechanical ventilation, prone positioning, anticoagulation, bleeding complications, and neurologic outcomes for infants, children, and adults undergoing ECMO in 2022. Additionally, issues related to cardiac ECMO, Harlequin syndrome, and anticoagulation during ECMO will be discussed.
Topics: Adult; Infant; Child; Humans; Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Respiration, Artificial; Registries; Patient Positioning; Anticoagulants; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37402582
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.10929 -
JAMA Dec 2023Prone positioning may improve outcomes in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but it is unknown whether prone positioning improves clinical...
IMPORTANCE
Prone positioning may improve outcomes in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but it is unknown whether prone positioning improves clinical outcomes among patients with ARDS who are undergoing venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) compared with supine positioning.
OBJECTIVE
To test whether prone positioning vs supine positioning decreases the time to successful ECMO weaning in patients with severe ARDS supported by VV-ECMO.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
Randomized clinical trial of patients with severe ARDS undergoing VV-ECMO for less than 48 hours at 14 intensive care units (ICUs) in France between March 3, 2021, and December 7, 2021.
INTERVENTIONS
Patients were randomized 1:1 to prone positioning (at least 4 sessions of 16 hours) (n = 86) or to supine positioning (n = 84).
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was time to successful ECMO weaning within 60 days following randomization. Secondary outcomes included ECMO and mechanical ventilation-free days, ICU and hospital length of stay, skin pressure injury, serious adverse events, and all-cause mortality at 90-day follow-up.
RESULTS
Among 170 randomized patients (median age, 51 [IQR, 43-59] years; n = 60 women [35%]), median respiratory system compliance was 15.0 (IQR, 10.7-20.6) mL/cm H2O; 159 patients (94%) had COVID-19-related ARDS; and 164 (96%) were in prone position before ECMO initiation. Within 60 days of enrollment, 38 of 86 patients (44%) had successful ECMO weaning in the prone ECMO group compared with 37 of 84 (44%) in the supine ECMO group (risk difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -14.9% to 15.2%]; subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.71-1.75]; P = .64). Within 90 days, no significant difference was observed in ECMO duration (28 vs 32 days; difference, -4.9 [95% CI, -11.2 to 1.5] days; P = .13), ICU length of stay, or 90-day mortality (51% vs 48%; risk difference, 2.4% [95% CI, -13.9% to 18.6%]; P = .62). No serious adverse events were reported during the prone position procedure.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Among patients with severe ARDS supported by VV-ECMO, prone positioning compared with supine positioning did not significantly reduce time to successful weaning of ECMO.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04607551.
Topics: Humans; Female; Middle Aged; Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Prone Position; Respiration, Artificial; Intensive Care Units; Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PubMed: 38038395
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.24491 -
Critical Care (London, England) Jul 2023During the COVID-19 pandemic, several centers had independently reported extending prone positioning beyond 24 h. Most of these centers reported maintaining patients in... (Review)
Review
During the COVID-19 pandemic, several centers had independently reported extending prone positioning beyond 24 h. Most of these centers reported maintaining patients in prone position until significant clinical improvement was achieved. One center reported extending prone positioning for organizational reasons relying on a predetermined fixed duration. A recent study argued that a clinically driven extension of prone positioning beyond 24 h could be associated with reduced mortality. On a patient level, the main benefit of extending prone positioning beyond 24 h is to maintain a more homogenous distribution of the gas-tissue ratio, thus delaying the increase in overdistention observed when patients are returned to the supine position. On an organizational level, extending prone positioning reduces the workload for both doctors and nurses, which might significantly enhance the quality of care in an epidemic. It might also reduce the incidence of accidental catheter and tracheal tube removal, thereby convincing intensive care units with low incidence of ARDS to prone patients more systematically. The main risk associated with extended prone positioning is an increased incidence of pressure injuries. Up until now, retrospective studies are reassuring, but prospective evaluation is needed.
Topics: Humans; Prone Position; Pandemics; Retrospective Studies; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; COVID-19; Respiration, Artificial; Patient Positioning
PubMed: 37408074
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-023-04526-2 -
Intensive Care Medicine Jun 2024
Topics: Humans; Prone Position; Patient Positioning
PubMed: 38656358
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-024-07413-8 -
Journal of Critical Care Dec 2023Awake prone positioning (APP) of non-intubated patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF) has been inconsistently adopted into routine care of patients... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Awake prone positioning (APP) of non-intubated patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF) has been inconsistently adopted into routine care of patients with COVID-19, likely due to apparent conflicting evidence from recent trials. This short guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for the use of APP in various clinical scenarios.
METHODS
An international multidisciplinary panel, assembled for their expertise and representativeness, and supported by a methodologist, performed a systematic literature search, summarized the available evidence derived from randomized clinical trials, and developed recommendations using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology.
RESULTS
The panel strongly recommends that APP rather than standard supine care be used in patients with COVID-19 receiving advanced respiratory support (high-flow nasal cannula, continuous positive airway pressure or non-invasive ventilation). Due to lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials, the panel provides no recommendation on the use of APP in patients with COVID-19 supported with conventional oxygen therapy, nor in patients with AHRF due to causes other than COVID-19.
CONCLUSION
APP should be routinely implemented in patients with COVID-19 receiving advanced respiratory support.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Prone Position; Wakefulness; Oxygen; Respiratory Insufficiency
PubMed: 37639921
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2023.154401 -
Critical Care (London, England) Aug 2023The effects of awake prone position on the breathing pattern of hypoxemic patients need to be better understood. We conducted a crossover trial to assess the... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
The effects of awake prone position on the breathing pattern of hypoxemic patients need to be better understood. We conducted a crossover trial to assess the physiological effects of awake prone position in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.
METHODS
Fifteen patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and PaO/FiO < 200 mmHg underwent high-flow nasal oxygen for 1 h in supine position and 2 h in prone position, followed by a final 1-h supine phase. At the end of each study phase, the following parameters were measured: arterial blood gases, inspiratory effort (ΔP), transpulmonary driving pressure (ΔP), respiratory rate and esophageal pressure simplified pressure-time product per minute (sPTP) by esophageal manometry, tidal volume (V), end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI), lung compliance, airway resistance, time constant, dynamic strain (V/EELI) and pendelluft extent through electrical impedance tomography.
RESULTS
Compared to supine position, prone position increased PaO/FiO (median [Interquartile range] 104 mmHg [76-129] vs. 74 [69-93], p < 0.001), reduced respiratory rate (24 breaths/min [22-26] vs. 27 [26-30], p = 0.05) and increased ΔP (12 cmHO [11-13] vs. 9 [8-12], p = 0.04) with similar sPTP (131 [75-154] cmHO s min vs. 105 [81-129], p > 0.99) and ΔP (9 [7-11] cmHO vs. 8 [5-9], p = 0.17). Airway resistance and time constant were higher in prone vs. supine position (9 cmHO s arbitrary units [4-11] vs. 6 [4-9], p = 0.05; 0.53 s [0.32-61] vs. 0.40 [0.37-0.44], p = 0.03). Prone position increased EELI (3887 arbitrary units [3414-8547] vs. 1456 [959-2420], p = 0.002) and promoted V distribution towards dorsal lung regions without affecting V size and lung compliance: this generated lower dynamic strain (0.21 [0.16-0.24] vs. 0.38 [0.30-0.49], p = 0.004). The magnitude of pendelluft phenomenon was not different between study phases (55% [7-57] of V in prone vs. 31% [14-55] in supine position, p > 0.99).
CONCLUSIONS
Prone position improves oxygenation, increases EELI and promotes V distribution towards dependent lung regions without affecting V size, ΔP, lung compliance and pendelluft magnitude. Prone position reduces respiratory rate and increases ΔP because of positional increases in airway resistance and prolonged expiratory time. Because high ΔP is the main mechanistic determinant of self-inflicted lung injury, caution may be needed in using awake prone position in patients exhibiting intense ΔP. Clinical trail registeration: The study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03095300) on March 29, 2017.
Topics: Humans; Prone Position; Respiration; Respiratory Insufficiency; Tidal Volume; Wakefulness; Cross-Over Studies
PubMed: 37592288
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-023-04600-9 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Jun 2023Awake prone positioning (APP) of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure gained considerable attention during the early phases of the coronavirus disease 2019... (Review)
Review
Awake prone positioning (APP) of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure gained considerable attention during the early phases of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, reports of APP were limited to case series in patients with influenza and in immunocompromised patients, with encouraging results in terms of tolerance and oxygenation improvement. Prone positioning of awake patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure appears to result in many of the same physiological changes improving oxygenation seen in invasively ventilated patients with moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. A number of randomised controlled studies published on patients with varying severity of COVID-19 have reported apparently contrasting outcomes. However, there is consistent evidence that more hypoxaemic patients requiring advanced respiratory support, who are managed in higher care environments and who can be prone for several hours, benefit most from APP use. We review the physiological basis by which prone positioning results in changes in lung mechanics and gas exchange and summarise the latest evidence base for APP primarily in COVID-19. We examine the key factors that influence the success of APP, the optimal target populations for APP and the key unknowns that will shape future research.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Wakefulness; Prone Position; Respiratory Insufficiency; Lung; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Patient Positioning
PubMed: 37137508
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0245-2022 -
Journal of Spine Surgery (Hong Kong) Sep 2023Lateral access lumbar interbody fusion is an increasingly popular procedure that allows for anterior column support through discectomy, endplate preparation, and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Lateral access lumbar interbody fusion is an increasingly popular procedure that allows for anterior column support through discectomy, endplate preparation, and interbody insertion. This procedure was initially described and performed with the patient in the lateral decubitus position. This would typically be followed by repositioning the patient to the prone position for pedicle screw fixation. Increasingly common is the lateral access lumbar interbody fusion in the prone position. This narrative review seeks to summarize the available literature on advantages, disadvantages, and unique features of the prone position lateral access lumbar interbody fusion.
METHODS
We performed a narrative review of articles published up to 01 November 2022 through a PubMed search. The search terms "prone lateral spine surgery" and "lateral approach spine surgery" AND "prone position" were used. Articles not available in English were excluded. The search result abstracts were independently reviewed by 2 authors and 28 full text articles were reviewed. Both reviewing authors were orthopedic surgery chief residents.
KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS
There are several unique advantages as well as disadvantages to the prone position lateral interbody fusion. Some advantages include ease of placing pedicle screws, simultaneous posterior and lateral access, greater ease in achieving segmental lumbar lordosis, and a relatively safer positioning of the psoas muscle, lumbar plexus, and abdominal structures. Disadvantages include more difficulties with exposure and retraction, as well as visualization, positioning and ergonomics of surgery.
CONCLUSIONS
Prone position lateral interbody fusion is an increasingly prevalent and useful surgical technique with several advantages and disadvantages when compared to lateral interbody fusion in the lateral decubitus position. There are several surgical indications and goals for which prone lateral interbody fusion may provide significant benefit when compared to other interbody fusion techniques.
PubMed: 37841787
DOI: 10.21037/jss-23-34